View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
laenee
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 369 Location: Shanghai
|
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 1:45 pm Post subject: Angenieux 70-210mm f/3.5 |
|
|
laenee wrote:
With Canon 5d
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3144 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Sat Oct 02, 2021 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Nice images! How does the lens compare to, let's say, an equivalent Nikkor lens? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
laenee
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 369 Location: Shanghai
|
Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2021 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
laenee wrote:
caspert79 wrote: |
Nice images! How does the lens compare to, let's say, an equivalent Nikkor lens? |
Thanks a lot, This is a high-quality lens produced by France in the 1960s and 1980s. It is very famous in the era of film
photography. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PBFACTS
Joined: 24 Dec 2008 Posts: 568
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2021 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
PBFACTS wrote:
laenee wrote: |
caspert79 wrote: |
Nice images! How does the lens compare to, let's say, an equivalent Nikkor lens? |
Thanks a lot, This is a high-quality lens produced by France in the 1960s and 1980s. It is very famous in the era of film
photography. |
When displayed ~1985 it was AT LEAST as good as any Canon/Nikon... 70 to 200 lens
The problem with those Angenieux lens (35/70 & 70/210) were
1- Very high price (over nikon price)
2- Lens body in makrolon = not professional feeling _________________ OM USER .. I KEEP/USE:
Om2 sp + T32 (grip/filter/zoom) + T8
+ Zuiko 16mm 3.5 / 55mm 1.2 / 65-200 4/ x1.4
+ Sigma 8mm 4.0 / 14mm 3.5 / 18-35 3.5-4.5
+ Tamron 35/105 2.8
+Tokina 150/500 5.6
+ Kiron 105/2.8 macro 1:1
+ Vivitar S1 90/180 falst field macro
+ 2x Doubler HR7
>>I SELL: OM10 + OM4ti
+ i sell: OM Md1 + Md 2 + Grip PowerPack + charger
+ i sell: OM Zuiko 24mm 2.8 / 28mm 3.5 / 50mm 1.8 / 50mm 1.4 / 50mm 3.5 macro / 35-70 3.6 / 35-105 3.5-4.5 / 75-150 4 / 500mm / 2xA
+ i sell: OM Kiron 28/105 3.2-4.5 / 1.5 converter
+ i sell: OM Makinon reflex 5.6/300 + Spector reflex (makinon) 500mm
+ i sell: OM Macro panagor extender 1:1
+ i sell: OM Sigma 16mm 2.8 fisheye (last version) / 21-35 3.5-4.2 ot/ 28-70 2.8 /1000mm mirror
+ i sell: Tamron 28-70 3.5-4.5 / 28-80 sp 3.5-4.2 / 28-135 sp 4-4.5 / /28-200 3.5 / 35-135 3..5-4.5 / 90mm sp macro 1:1 2.8
+ i sell: OM Soligor 2x doubler / x3 converte
+ i sell: Soligor FisheEye x0.15
+ i sell: OM Tokina 28/135 4-4.6 / 70/210 3.5 (= vivitar S1 v2)
+ i sell: OM Vivitar 28-70 3.5-4.8 / 28-90 s1 2.8-3.5 / 35-70 2.8-3.8 / 55/2.8 Macro 1:1 (komine) / 70-150 3.8 ot (kiron) / 75-150 ot 3.8 (tokina + 2x matched)
+ i sell : OM cosina 100-500 5.6/8 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 10472 Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2021 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
_________________ T* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
laenee
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 369 Location: Shanghai
|
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2021 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
laenee wrote:
Thanks a lot !
WIth Sony A7R
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3144 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2021 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Like the image with the bikers 👠|
|
Back to top |
|
|
guardian
Joined: 18 Mar 2009 Posts: 1746
|
Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
guardian wrote:
PBFACTS wrote: |
2- Lens body in makrolon = not professional feeling |
Interesting. I was unaware of that and I'm surprised. Good to know.
I own a copy of the Angenieux LB-1 which is 35-140mm at f2.2, so a somewhat larger lens. It was manufactured in the late 1960's and has a metal body. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 868
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2021 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
Very nice pics! _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alsatian2017
Joined: 05 Mar 2018 Posts: 239
|
Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2021 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alsatian2017 wrote:
PBFACTS wrote: |
When displayed ~1985 it was AT LEAST as good as any Canon/Nikon... 70 to 200 lens
The problem with those Angenieux lenses (35/70 & 70/210) was
1- Very high price (over Nikon price)
2- Lens body in Makrolon = not professional feeling |
1. At the beginning of the 1980s, the Angenieux 70-210 f/3.5 was sold at 6300 F, the Nikkor 80-200 mm f/4 at 7400 F, the Angenieux 35-70 mm f/2.5-3.3 at 5400 F vs. the Canon FD 35-70 mm f/2.8-3.5 at 6850 F (French prices from Chasseur d'images Spécial Objectifs"). Thus, the two Angenieux lenses weren't overpriced, which is very different from today's prices, fuelled by collectors...
2. Here you have a point, but the 70-210 mm existed in two subsequent versions, the first one in Makrolon, the second one in metal finish. BTW, the Canon FD 80-200 f/4 L did not have a better finish which didn't hamper its sales. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3952 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2021 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Alsatian2017 wrote: |
PBFACTS wrote: |
When displayed ~1985 it was AT LEAST as good as any Canon/Nikon... 70 to 200 lens
The problem with those Angenieux lenses (35/70 & 70/210) was
1- Very high price (over Nikon price)
2- Lens body in Makrolon = not professional feeling |
1. At the beginning of the 1980s, the Angenieux 70-210 f/3.5 was sold at 6300 F, the Nikkor 80-200 mm f/4 at 7400 F, the Angenieux 35-70 mm f/2.5-3.3 at 5400 F vs. the Canon FD 35-70 mm f/2.8-3.5 at 6850 F (French prices from Chasseur d'images Spécial Objectifs"). |
OOPS!! That would mean >CHF 2000.-- for the Angenieux 70-210mm!! Certainly a crazy price for a 70-210mm back then. I remember the Minolta AF 4/70-210mm "beercan" being CHF 398.-- back in 1988 ... and that was the official price, not the street price! Are you sure the Nikkor and the Canon 35-70 were that expensive back then ??? Sounds really strange to me ... I know that many Nikkor MF lenses went through the roof around 1998, but that was 15 years later. I remember, however, the Angenieux zoom to be around CHF 2000.-- back then, and therefore I did consider it to be "way overpriced".
Alsatian2017 wrote: |
Thus, the two Angenieux lenses weren't overpriced, |
I dare to disagree - but, to be honest, I never had the opportunity to test them. If they are really better than say the nFD 80-200L, I might revise my opinion!
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alsatian2017
Joined: 05 Mar 2018 Posts: 239
|
Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2021 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alsatian2017 wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
Alsatian2017 wrote: |
PBFACTS wrote: |
When displayed ~1985 it was AT LEAST as good as any Canon/Nikon... 70 to 200 lens
The problem with those Angenieux lenses (35/70 & 70/210) was
1- Very high price (over Nikon price)
2- Lens body in Makrolon = not professional feeling |
1. At the beginning of the 1980s, the Angenieux 70-210 f/3.5 was sold at 6300 F, the Nikkor 80-200 mm f/4 at 7400 F, the Angenieux 35-70 mm f/2.5-3.3 at 5400 F vs. the Canon FD 35-70 mm f/2.8-3.5 at 6850 F (French prices from Chasseur d'images Spécial Objectifs"). |
OOPS!! That would mean >CHF 2000.-- for the Angenieux 70-210mm!! Certainly a crazy price for a 70-210mm back then. I remember the Minolta AF 4/70-210mm "beercan" being CHF 398.-- back in 1988 ... and that was the official price, not the street price! Are you sure the Nikkor and the Canon 35-70 were that expensive back then ??? Sounds really strange to me ... I know that many Nikkor MF lenses went through the roof around 1998, but that was 15 years later. I remember, however, the Angenieux zoom to be around CHF 2000.-- back then, and therefore I did consider it to be "way overpriced".
Alsatian2017 wrote: |
Thus, the two Angenieux lenses weren't overpriced, |
I dare to disagree - but, to be honest, I never had the opportunity to test them. If they are really better than say the nFD 80-200L, I might revise my opinion!
S |
Hello Steve,
did you get the conversion from French Francs to Swiss Francs right ? The prices I mentioned were just copied from my "Spécial objectifs ", published in 1987 (I just had to search a while to find the date ..) , so I guess the information is right. I didn't include the price of the Nikkor 35 -70 mm f/3. 5, marked as "discontinued" at that time and thus only available second hand. BTW, the journalists of "Chasseur d'images" didn't find the 70-210 mm f/3.5 as good as the best of the Japanese lenses of that time (which were the Canon FD 80-200 f/4 L and the Nikkor AI-S 80-200 f/2.8 ...). They gave the Angénieux 3 stars in performance and 3 stars in price/performance ratio (Canon FD L 4 stars/4 Stars, Nikkor 4 Stars in performance and a non-disclosed rating for the price/performance since the price was 30.000 French Francs at the time...). The 35-70 mm f/2.5-3.3 did do as well as the Canon 35-70 mm f/2.8-3.5 but not better; the advantage was rather in practical terms (slightly faster optics and lower MFD), but nothing which would justify its prices today. One interesting fact : they tested several copies of the Angénieux DEM 180 mm f/2.3 Apo and found it less good than the best of the Japanese and German lenses...
Greetings from Alsace
Volker |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3952 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2021 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Alsatian2017 wrote: |
Hello Steve,
did you get the conversion from French Francs to Swiss Francs right ? |
I hope so - I asumed 1983 and found about 1 CHF = 3.7 FFR! For 1987 it would be about 1 CHF = 4 FFR. [/quote]
Alsatian2017 wrote: |
The prices I mentioned were just copied from my "Spécial objectifs ", published in 1987 (I just had to search a while to find the date ..) , so I guess the information is right. I didn't include the price of the Nikkor 35 -70 mm f/3. 5, marked as "discontinued" at that time and thus only available second hand. |
I certainly remember the official Swiss Minolta AF prices from 1987/88, but don't really remember the exact Nikon / Canon prices. Canon FD were rather modest (comparable to Minolta AF) and Nikon slightly higher, but not that much.
Alsatian2017 wrote: |
BTW, the journalists of "Chasseur d'images" didn't find the 70-210 mm f/3.5 as good as the best of the Japanese lenses of that time (which were the Canon FD 80-200 f/4 L and the Nikkor AI-S 80-200 f/2.8 ...). They gave the Angénieux 3 stars in performance and 3 stars in price/performance ratio (Canon FD L 4 stars/4 Stars, Nikkor 4 Stars in performance and a non-disclosed rating for the price/performance since the price was 30.000 French Francs at the time...). The 35-70 mm f/2.5-3.3 did do as well as the Canon 35-70 mm f/2.8-3.5 but not better; the advantage was rather in practical terms (slightly faster optics and lower MFD), but nothing which would justify its prices today. |
Thanks for this additional information!
Alsatian2017 wrote: |
One interesting fact : they tested several copies of the Angénieux DEM 180 mm f/2.3 Apo and found it less good than the best of the Japanese and German lenses...
Greetings from Alsace
Volker |
Interesting - and about what I was remembering from similar tests in German and Swiss photo magazines. "Best of German" was proably the Leica APO Telyt 3.4/180?? And "best of Japan" the ED Nikkor 2.8/180mm??
Gr S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alsatian2017
Joined: 05 Mar 2018 Posts: 239
|
Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alsatian2017 wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
I certainly remember the official Swiss Minolta AF prices from 1987/88, but don't really remember the exact Nikon / Canon prices. Canon FD were rather modest (comparable to Minolta AF) and Nikon slightly higher, but not that much. |
The Canon FD 35-70 mm was outrageously expensive back then, much more than the FD 80-200 L...
stevemark wrote: |
Interesting - and about what I was remembering from similar tests in German and Swiss photo magazines. "Best of German" was proably the Leica APO Telyt 3.4/180?? And "best of Japan" the ED Nikkor 2.8/180mm??
|
The best 180/200 mm lenses according to the testers of Chasseur d'images were the Nikkor 180 mm f/2.8 AI and AF versions (the latter being a little bit better than the former), the Leica APO Telyt-R 180mm f/3.4 and the Elmarit-R 180mm f/2.8 (second model), followed by the Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f/2.8, Tamron SP 180 mm f/2.5 LD Pentax A * 200 mm f/2.8 ED, Nikkor 200 mm f/4 and Canon nFD 200 mm f/4. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|